Subject: [P2Prg] Sub-group mailing lists.

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:56:18 -0500

Folk:

Greetings.  I come bearing mailing lists:  the subgroup lists are
ready.  

The mailing lists are of the form:

  p2prg-[X]@cs.umd.edu

where [X] \in {mobility, metadata, drlp, security, apps, overlay}.

There is a web page for each of the lists at:
     http://www.cs.umd.edu/mailman/listinfo/p2prg-[X]

Users can subscribe, unsubscribe, and change preferences from these
pages.  There is also an email-based interface. You can get
information about using the email interface sending a message with
just the word 'help' as subject or in the body, to:

     p2prg-[X][email-masked]

Right now, I have added some default admins; we'll be adding subgroup
leaders as admins. 

Please subscribe to appropriate lists, and I hope we can start using
these to their full effect soon.  

Bill and Bobby.

p.s. 
Just to ensure I have not confused anyone with my notation, the
"mobility" list would be accessible via

[email-masked]

Note also that our usual irtf hosted list will also remain active.

_______________________________________________
P2prg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2prg

---

From: Sam Joseph <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 20:07:12 +0900

Hi All,

Many thanks to Bobby for the new lists.  I'm subscribed to 
p2prg-metadata, and I hope others will join.

Since that might take a while I thought I'd just post an introductory 
mail to both the main list and the meta-data list.  In future I'll just 
post to the meta-data list.

So the concept for the meta-data subgroup comes to a certain extent from 
a review paper I published last year:

http://search.ieice.org/2003/pdf/e86-b_6_1740.pdf

Due to a problem with proof reading the abstract came through in rather 
odd English, but I hope you'll forgive that and read on.  Here's an 
excerpt from the introduction:

"Recent developments in peer-to-peer networks have centered on the 
concept of distributed hashtables (DHT) or content routing.  These 
approaches assume possession of a hash or other identifier that 
precisely specifies the document the user wishes to retrieve.  Naturally 
there are some situations in which a user only has more general 
information about their needs, e.g. keywords or other meta-data.   A 
number of different strategies for handling this kind of search in 
peer-to-peer networks have recently come to light [and are described 
herein]."

So meta-data strategies is all about trying to deal with data that 
imprecisely defines the things we are searching for.  To my mind it also 
encapsulated issues of trust and reputation, because the crucial thing 
about an open p2p system is that everyone can publish meta-data and 
no-one gets to vet it for accuracy; at least not at the moment it is 
published.  Trust or reputation ratings assigned to peers or files in a 
p2p network can be thought of as a kind of meta-data, and so I am 
currently trying to assemble a list of different p2p reputation 
systems.  You can see my ongoing notes and listing here:

http://www.neurogrid.net/twiki/bin/view/Main/ReputationAndTrust

It's all a bit rough, but then it's a wiki, so anyone who wants to dive 
in and help me organise all this, I would be most grateful.  One day it 
might become another review paper on p2p reputation :-) Co-authors would 
be most welcome.

I think my ongoing objectives are to try and classify all the different 
approaches to meta-data, trust and reputation in different p2p systems.  
Ultimately I'd like to try and move towards some standardized ways of 
publishing meta-data.  However in the first instance I think a 
taxonomical approach is the best to try and help us all get a feel for 
what is on offer in this developing field.

My own review of MetaData strategies is in all likelihood out of data 
already, so let's see what we can do to keep ourselves up to date.  I 
think a good short term goal would be to put together a list of relevant 
publications on the wiki - ideally with notes and comments hidden one 
layer down.

Comments, thoughts?

Thanks in advance.

CHEERS> SAM